Browne Jacobson delves into Burnham’s potential focus points, discussing devolution, social housing and more through a legal lens.
On social housing
Gabor Taller, Partner and Co-Head of Social Housing, said: “Burnham’s pledge to deliver the biggest programme of council house building since the Second World War is one of the most striking commitments of his campaign. He has suggested funding it by redirecting the existing £39bn affordable housing programme entirely towards social rent homes.
“While Burnham specifically references council house building, the role he envisages for registered providers in achieving this remains unclear – and the detail is yet to emerge. That is significant, because the latest figures show registered providers have delivered more social rented homes than in any year in the last decade, demonstrating both their capacity and commitment.
“Burnham speaks of a national housing-first approach and building the broadest coalition possible – pointing to the Manchester model and its record of successful cross-sector working. Registered providers stand ready to be a central part of that effort.
READ MORE: A housing brief That Starts with Fabric First
“The shift in funding focus towards social rent is understandable, but I would encourage government not to abandon shared ownership entirely. It has often been unfairly conflated in the press with leasehold and fire safety concerns, but in the right location it remains a positive and much-needed bridge into home ownership.
“The legal and structural challenges are substantial – local authorities need borrowing headroom, land, planning capacity and a sustainable long-term revenue model. Turning this vision into delivery will require a root-and-branch review of the local authority housing finance framework – something that has been neglected for far too long.”
On devolution and the ‘Manchesterism’ models
Laura Hughes, Partner and Head of Public Law, said: “Deeper devolution that gives mayoral combined authorities genuine control over powers and finances relating to portfolios such as further education is a core Andy Burnham policy.
“It reflects what he’s built in Greater Manchester, where he has acknowledged prevention is better than cure. He understands that unemployment among 16 to 24-year-olds is a major reason for escalating welfare costs and tackling this issue begins with better early years education.
“However, while it’s absolutely right that other areas should benefit from the additional powers given to Greater Manchester as part of the trailblazer devolution deal it secured, Sir Keir Starmer’s government had already introduced a process to enable the wholesale rolling out of these powers to strategic authorities via the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Act.
“Burnham may be able to accelerate the granting of additional powers to existing strategic authorities – and the creation of new ones – but questions remain on whether he is prepared to remove ringfencing around budgets so that mayors are given flexibility to make health interventions via education spending, for example.
“Real fiscal autonomy holds the key to devolution delivering meaningful change in areas such as transport, skills and housing. Without genuine control over taxation and revenue, local areas remain fundamentally dependent on the centre – and that dependency undermines the very accountability that devolution is supposed to create.
“The Treasury was already developing a roadmap for fiscal devolution ahead of the Spending Review 2027, including proposals to let localities retain more benefit from local economic expansion.
“Burnham should accelerate this work and be explicit that it extends beyond England. The asymmetry between the devolved nations remains a structural problem – Wales and Northern Ireland do not enjoy the same degree of fiscal devolution as Scotland, and that imbalance creates real tensions in the intergovernmental landscape that no government has yet resolved. Burnham has already ruled out reforming the Barnett formula.
“A genuine fiscal devolution settlement has to be a whole-UK conversation, not an English one conducted in isolation. Having spent a decade arguing that the centre holds too much power, the new Prime Minister is better placed than most to make that case. But he will need to grapple with the structural questions that have been ducked for too long.”
On adult social care reform and neighbourhood working
James Arrowsmith, Partner specialising in social care, said: “Andy Burnham has made it clear he wants to move quickly on adult social care. This may involve an acceleration of the Casey Commission’s work, with a view to bringing forward a report on changes that can be made at pace to be published later this year.
“Integrating only health and care is not enough, with Greater Manchester one place where we have seen a wide range of policy levers used to improve outcomes. We expect Burnham’s government, leveraging recommendations in this first phase report, to investigate the wider determinants of health and care outcomes. This would likely recognise, as we’ve seen in Manchester, that factors such as employment and housing have a significant impact on care.
READ MORE: Will the Prime Minister rip up the broken affordable housing model?
“The likely continuation of local government reorganisation as a priority policy stream will help to bring together a broader set of local services that can facilitate this more holistic approach to care.
“Greater Manchester and The North West are also home to local authorities often held up as exemplars of neighbourhood working, which can reduce avoidable emergency admissions, support earlier intervention and ease pressure on acute services when done well.
“This suggests greater devolution of power and budget to places and regions can facilitate a better joined-up approach at local level to develop responses to care needs, rather than simply prescriptive guidance. That devolution has formed one of Burnham’s first major policy positions is therefore unsurprising.
“A ‘Manchesterism’ approach may also involve care treated as an essential public service that isn’t well suited to treatment as a market, similar to his statements on utilities and transport. How this will play out through the reform agenda is less certain. We have seen concerns raised in relation to unintended consequences of profit caps and a wider readjustment of the public sector/private sector relationships in care is a complex proposition. Unlike in the case of utilities, there are significant questions around how to balance prevention and response, with a strong argument to do more on prevention as a priority.
“Having expressed a willingness to take on difficult decisions, Burnham’s arrival in Number 10 signals the prospects for radical reform are increased, headlined by upstream interventions, potential new funding models and a roadmap towards an NHS-style care service.
“What may be challenging is timing constraints, which may make it difficult to show tangible outcomes, not just costs, ahead of the next general election. With so much civil service capacity already committed to local government reorganisation and children’s social care, there’s also a question of who is going to steer such a transformative agenda.”
